More Notes on the Obama Coalition

by: Matt Stoller

Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:22


( - promoted by Chris Bowers)


(via Edge of the American West)

Chris noted the polling shifts for Obama, which seem significant.  I have no special insight at this point, it seems like it could go either way on Tuesday, with national polls comfirming the Obama trend.  One point that isn't getting enough attention is how much of an advantage Obama has going beyond Tuesday, considering he can raise huge amounts of money regardless of whether he wins or loses.  His donors aren't tapped out, and they give when he loses because they think he is an underdog.  Clinton's donors believe they paid for a win and they get upset when she loses.

I have one slight disagreement with Chris about the Obama coalition.

So, let's see here: a campaign that uses extensive internet organizing, huge campaign rallies, heavy youth and creative class support, a record breaking number of small donors, a fulfilled promise of record turnout, and combination of Dean and Clark voters to force the best possible candidate the Democratic establishment could offer down to the wire?

This is true, but insufficient.  Obama's coalition includes DC journalists and the Clinton-hating establishment.  When Dan Gerstein, Chris Matthews, Bill Bennett, and Joe Scarborough - to pick four at random - are incessantly praising Obama and bashing Clinton, it's worth noting because it's quite possible, even probable, that Obama will be just as polarizing as Clinton very soon after winning the nomination.

I'll note that I don't think this is a bad thing.  Polarization is a natural phenomenon when people disagree with each other, and that's what voting is for.  I'll happily push for whoever the Democratic nominee is, because I expect either one of them to be trashed viciously by the Village.  For what it's worth (and it's not worth much), it seems to me that Obama now has the edge.

... Ooops.  The reason I wrote this post was to discuss the relative field operations of the two campaigns.  Obama probably has a slight edge there, and has been building in the February 5th states for some time.  Clinton is carefully targeting women.
Matt Stoller :: More Notes on the Obama Coalition

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
More Notes on the Obama Coalition | 31 comments
I would be happy if... (0.00 / 0)
...Obama polarized the nation into 60/40 groups. I'd be perfectly okay with 40% of the country hating Obama if the other 60% was behind him.

That's much better than a 50/50 divide.  

True to a point (0.00 / 0)
But Bill Clinton, whilst he failed to get 50% in both his runs for president, largely managed to maintain that 60/40% split. The difference is just that it went from 40% disliking him to 40% believing he was basically the anti-Christ.

Hillary's more hated amongst her opponents now than Bill was when he started his term, but let's not pretend that all Clinton opponents are propelled by irrational hatred. She could, though perhaps less easily than Obama, try to get a 60/40 split.

I know that's beside the point, I just wanted to raise the issue that Obama's not the only one who could potentially do that.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

[ Parent ]
That's true (0.00 / 0)
None of this would be possible without the Clinton-hating media and Clinton-hating village. It is sort of Dean voters and activists plus Clark voters and activists plus African-Americans plus the Village plus new young voters. The hatred of the Village simply aligned with those voters this time, instead of against them, as happened with Jackson in 1988 and Dean in 2004. It is a temporary alignment of interests that will disappear quickly.

Clinton actually has important parts of a potentially much larger progressive coalition, too. She wins Latinos and women, for example,  and makes larger inroads into the liberal vote. I should have noted that Clinton isn't shut out among this group, only that Obama has a larger share.

Netroots (0.00 / 0)
None of this would be possible without the Clinton-hating media and Clinton-hating village.

And the Clinton-hating progressive blogosphere.  

Banned for posting five straight diaries.

[ Parent ]
Huh? (0.00 / 0)
When Dan Gerstein, Chris Matthews, Bill Bennett, and Joe Scarborough...are incessantly praising Obama and bashing Clinton, it's worth noting because it's quite possible, even probable, that Obama will be just as polarizing as Clinton very soon after winning the nomination.

The logic of this argument escapes me. The premise seems to be completely unrelated to the conclusion.

Me too.. (0.00 / 0)
I would like an explanation... Also...

Obama polarizing vs. Clinton polarizing --- er no comparsion in my mind... ??

[ Parent ]
It's The Punditalkcrazy, Stupid! (0.00 / 0)
Who the hell do you think made a couple of centrist Dems into polarizing figures in the first place???

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"
[ Parent ]
Yeah! (0.00 / 0)
...But with the years we've had the Clinton's front - left and center... 'THEY' have so much MORE material to work with...

Duh!  Where have YOU been...!  Stuck in an academic hole too long?

[ Parent ]
Actually meant to say... (0.00 / 0)
front and center and behind

The business stuff alone by Mr Clinton --- will cause massive conflicts of interest between the two of them... !  -- The media bringing up the two'fers business dealings and exposing the hyprocrisy of the Clinton message -- the GE will turn into one massive mud fight...

I'm not taking part -- You defend them -- I'm not...

e.g.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

This -- in the 'conservative' British press... The Billary's seem to be having a soft time in the US media at the moment... hmmm wonder why?

[ Parent ]
Why is it... (0.00 / 0)
that we never look at the business dealings of political wives to see if they have "massive conflicts of interest?"  Or do we?  Just askin'...
[ Parent ]
Big difference when the 'spouse' was a former President... (0.00 / 0)
AND running as a TWO'fer...

[ Parent ]
Since when (0.00 / 0)
are they running as a two-fer?  Has Hillary said that, or are you quoting the infamous village pundits?
[ Parent ]
Whatever... (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
The Problem With Personal Insults Instead of Policy Arguments (0.00 / 0)
is that folks invaribaly get the personal insults just as wrong as they get the policy.

Duh!  Where have YOU been...!  Stuck in an academic hole too long?

No, I'm a journalist. I write for the masses for a living.

Is the concept of a "side project" too arcane?

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

[ Parent ]
You started it! (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
centrism (0.00 / 0)
Who the hell do you think made a couple of centrist Dems into polarizing figures in the first place???

The polarization has nothing to do with issues, the Clinton's have to take such centrist positions to make up for the fact that they are polarizing.  That is why people who describe them selves as very liberal, aren't voting for her. Their political style makes it impossible for them to push progressive agenda.

The polarization is a result of their political style.  It is because of things like right wing machine, making every criticism into something personal.  

[ Parent ]
That and the fact that some Villagers (4.00 / 1)
Like Sally Quinn thought Bill was trailer trash.  They never thought he was "one of them."  They actually liked Reagan better because he has "Hollywood style."  Really.  Digby has written innumerable columns on this.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.
[ Parent ]
Nonsense! (0.00 / 0)
They were always centrists.

I had a conversation with Harold Meyerson during the early '92 primary period, when Tsongas was still in the thick of it, and I remarked on the irony of having two Eisenhower Republicans leading the Dem field.  And Meyerson shot back, "Oh, no.  Clinton is an Eisenhower Democrat."

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

[ Parent ]
Just listened to a show on Air America (0.00 / 0)
I was in the car and I think it was a Nation magazine debate?  Anyho... this guy that just spoke up said that McCain has a better record fighting against the MIC than the Clintons do...  Oh Boy!
[ Parent ]
Uppity women and minorities (0.00 / 0)
She's polarizing because she assumes the privilege of a white man. She can do that as a prominent, privileged white woman. In truth, everyone should be able to assume the privilege of white men. She can so everyone has a problem with that.

If Obama became President, he will have "become white" and people will have an even bigger problem with that. Whiteness is not about white ethnicities or cultures but the dominant culture.

Banned for posting five straight diaries.

[ Parent ]
Going the distance (0.00 / 0)
The fundraising problem you mentioned could be huge.  Tim Russert said this morning on MTP that the Clinton campaign raised $10 million in January, a very strong month for her, probably one of her strongest yet.  But that's less than a third of what the Obama campaign raised in January.

Could Clinton's campaign be broke on February 6th?  The Obama campaign is not only running ads in every February 5th state but Illinois, they've already got ads up in the other upcoming February primaries.

I think the Clinton campaign might have more riding on the results on Tuesday just because they need a win to go back to their donors for more.  At least at the moment, it looks like the Obama campaign has the funds and the fundraising machine to go the distance...  

One Million Strong --- Join up!

Daily Tracking polls showing Clinton momentum (0.00 / 0)
What do people make of the recent bump for Hillary in both the Gallup & Rasmussen daily trackings.  Yesterday it seemed like maybe just an aberration, but her lead jumped big again in today's Rasmussen post. http://www.rasmussenreports.co...

Is it possible that the debate convinced people that they are both great candidates, but it isn't Obama's turn yet?

[ Parent ]
Hillary depends on large donors (0.00 / 0)
How do you go back for more to people who've already given $2300 or %4600 per couple?   Legally?  

Obama has many $200 to $1200 people who can probably give double or maybe more.  Thius gives him an immense edge after Feb 5.

And there isn't any NH on the horizon in Feb to rescue her.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

[ Parent ]
um (0.00 / 0)
This is true, but insufficient.  Obama's coalition includes DC journalists and the Clinton-hating establishment.  When Dan Gerstein, Chris Matthews, Bill Bennett, and Joe Scarborough - to pick four at random - are incessantly praising Obama and bashing Clinton, it's worth noting because it's quite possible, even probable, that Obama will be just as polarizing as Clinton very soon after winning the nomination.

I'm so sick of the meme that the media is anti Clinton, it makes her look weak.  Stop making her campaign the victim.

Hello! Welcome to Earth! (0.00 / 0)
What planet are you from?

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.
[ Parent ]
Obama is using the internet created coalition for himself only (4.00 / 2)
But 2 main things that the internet coalition were about were progressive Demcratic politics and understanding that partisanship is good for Demcocrats and good for the country.

Obana is none of that.  And yet all the people on the internet seemd to have cast this aside in their rush to embrace him.  Maybe we have gotten too big all the newbies at dKos are the most avid Obama supporters- for that message to get through the normal standard media filter that bipartisanship is just wonderful.. Maybe the only message that got through was when it comes to Congress, but not the presidency this is how we judge. Where's the push left going to come in an Obama administration?

Secondly I think that the internet folks have decided that if he's been embraced as Chris says by the creative class, we should just resign ourselves to it. Maybe that's why the front page posters have ignored 2 BIG stories that just happened in the last 2 days because it makes it crystal clear that Obama is neither progressive nor partisan.

There is the Harry and Louise mailer from Obama falsely attacking Clinton's health plan from the right using the hoariset right wing icons ever - Harry and Louise.

For all those who say if elected Obama would go for universal health care, this mailer precludes it.  He's campaigned agaimst a fundamental Democratic party value ....universal healtcare.

The second big story is the Exelon story in the NY Times which tells you that when push comes to shove...when he meets opposition....he backs down.

On this bill there were big donors and big industry involved ...okay no lobbyist money but the owner of the company is one of his biggest supporters and folks in his company donated over $200,000 to Obama.

He puts a hold on a nominee...he takes it off....every version  of the bill gets weaker so that at the end there is nothing more than voluntary compliance which is temporary only.  Then he LIES to Iowans that the bill was  passed when it didn't pass.

These 2 stories a complete picture of the Obama presidency in miniature.  

THERE HAVE BEEN NO FRONT PAGE POSTS ON THIS BLOG OR ANY OF THE OTHER POLITICAL BLOGS. There should be....these stories are very telling.

I don't get it.  Has everyone decided to close their eyes in fear because there is momentum?

Chris and Matt

How does it feel to have the internet taken over for purposes that are in contradiction to its own core messages?  Indeed if Obama is nominee then why should he pay attention to you.  The left blogosphere will have LESS POWER TO PUSH BACK AGAINST HIM THAN THEY WOULD IF HILLARY CLINTON THE NOMINEE.  And if elected forget about it.

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller

polarizers (0.00 / 0)
This is absurd:
it's worth noting because it's quite possible, even probable, that Obama will be just as polarizing as Clinton very soon after winning the nomination.

I see and hear it everywhere, and it just doesn't hold up.

If one only looks at Favorables and Unfavorables to gauge polarization, then Obama might get to Clintonian numbers, mostly thanks to the Republican smear machine.
But those numbers don't always reflect relative strength of feeling towards a public figure, and they don't factor in how long a person has been viewed that way. In other words, Obama is so new to the scene that views about him will shift a lot and not harden into stone, as they have in the minds of many Clinton haters (of which I am not one), in both parties.

But the real reason it doesn't work is that polarization can't be measured in simple numbers. It has to do with so many emotional responses: how someone sounds, how they treat their colleagues, how they fight, and how, or if, they genuinely try to work with the other side.

Think about how polarizing Bush is. Then think about where Obama is. In my estimation, he'll never approach that territory.

Obama as polarizing???? (0.00 / 0)
Perhaps in a racial sense with less than a majority of the population, we don't really know how many.  But probably not too many are Dem voters.  And except in some pockets of the country, there will be some limits on how much racially based attacks will be tolerated.  Suburbanites and elites don't like to think of themselves as racists, whatever the more subtle realities, so there will be pushback, as we saw with Bill C in So Carolina.

And in the sense that Obama is a Dem, and many on the Right will go after any Dem.

But beyond that, to put Obama in the same camp as Hillary just suggests that someone hasn't experienced American politics for very long.  The Clintons were the most polarizing people since Nixon and until GW Bush.

Here, FWIW, is an anecdote.  My mother is in a skilled nursing facility in Oakland, CA.  I was discussing Obama with a member of the staff (African-American woman) who also supports Obama and she laughingly said she overheard two women residents in the Independent Living part of the facility talking, and one said to the other of Obama, "Well at least he's half one of us!"  That made then ok voting for him.  But then this is a place that regularly sends out candlelighters (with flashlights) to the anti-war vigils and has a UN support chapter.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

[ Parent ]
I love that bumper sticker! (4.00 / 1)
It encapsulates why I don't have a dog in the Clinton-Obama fight. I could see either of them winning or losing in November, and I suspect both would disappoint me as president. If my state were voting on Tuesday, I'd vote for Edwards, even if I had to write him in.

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.
Thoughts from an Edwards supporter (0.00 / 0)
Since I was thrown onto the undecided shore again last week, I've been looking at the local Hillary and Obama operations.  Yesterday Bill Clinton was in Huntsville at a rally for Clinton -- he's a great extemporaneous speaker, the event ran smoothly and they had a crowd of 2500 or so.  The message was Hillary is experienced, the 90's were good, universal health care, out of Iraq and, oh by the way, Ted Kennedy got it wrong on NCLB.

I just talked to the local Hillary coordinator and they don't have an office here. She said they had no buttons, no bumper stickers and no signs and thought it would be a depressing experience to have an office.  They are setting up some visibility opportunities where people will wave signs at passers by.  She told me there is one paid staffer locally.

After the Clinton rally yesterday I went down to the local Obama office.  They are open 9 am to 9 pm M-S and noon until 9 pm on Sunday.  They're running training sessions for precinct captains, poll watchers and canvassers.  While we were there they finished up a training session for a faith based literature drop they're doing at local churches this morning.  They are phone banking and canvassing. These are all things that I and some other activists have been pushing local Dems to do for some time.  We never had the manpower and there was always significant opposition from the party old timers -- we've never done it that way.  Apparently the Obama campaign has both the will and the local volunteers to do it.  They told me there are 30 paid staffers in Alabama, but none in Huntsville at the moment.  They don't have yard signs either, but had buttons, bumper stickers and brochures.

Here in my neck of the woods, the party establishment has lined up behind Hillary Clinton but the grassroots excitement is with Obama.  I knew a few of the people at the Obama HQ, but most of them were people I'd never seen before -- and neither had anyone else.  They are new to political activism.  One woman I talked to was 47 years old and had never worked for a candidate, never given money and never asked anyone to support a candidate for president.  She's a small business owner who met Barack Obama at some kind of business seminar a couple of years ago and was blown away.

Even if he loses, Obama is bringing a new crop of people into politics.  I just hope they stay with it.

Join the conversation at Left In Alabama.

Obama as polarizing as Clinton? (0.00 / 0)

t's worth noting because it's quite possible, even probable, that Obama will be just as polarizing as Clinton very soon after winning the nomination.

Probable? Matt, could you back that up, please? I've heard a lot more evidence to the contrary.

The truth about Saxby Chambliss

More Notes on the Obama Coalition | 31 comments
Donate to Open Left









QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.

blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox